Bruce Billson (Dunkley, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Sustainable Development and Cities) Share this | Hansard source

In the few minutes that are available to me, I will pick up from where the member for Lyne started the discussion on the matter of public importance today, and that is around the engagement of households on climate change. One thing the member for Lyne may care to reflect on, as I think all people should reflect on, is that this parliament building is no place to start. It is the biggest house in our nation, yet this house is not really excelling at all in providing an example on climate change. The current government, led by the then opposition leader, the Hon. Kevin Rudd, made the election commitment that this parliament building would be powered by green power—all of it. We made some inquiries about this during Senate estimates and found that that promise has not been kept. Not only has it been overlooked but it has been overlooked in such a way that this federal Labor government seems to have no intention whatsoever of upholding the undertakings and the commitment it made to the Australian public.

When we asked why this parliamentary building was not achieving the levels of clean and green energy that were promised to the Australian people by the federal Labor Party, the answer we got was one that basically said, ‘It’s too expensive.’ Senate estimates questioning revealed that the federal Labor government had buried its promise of a green-powered Parliament House and had opted for a 10 per cent—not 100 per cent—energy outcome and participation in a government-wide electricity contract arrangement which will go nowhere near the election promise. This is in order to avoid what the government said were ‘significant budget costs’. So when we are talking about sustainable houses in Australia, the Parliament of Australia, this House, is really not living up to the promises made by the federal Labor Party and by this government when in opposition, and they should be held to account for that.

This does go some way to explaining why a tweet came out from the Prime Minister in which he was actually shopping around, looking for someone to give him ideas. It is quite extraordinary to find that the Prime Minister of Australia is actually calling for people to give him ideas about energy-saving measures for households. This was the tweet that went out on 1 September: ‘Are there any new ideas out there for energy savings measures for households?’ I am sure that the reason that tweet went out was because of the disarray that you see in this federal Labor government in relation to energy savings, and that is why there is such a focus on stunts and symbolism but not a commitment to embed sustainability in the operations of this parliament building, in the policies that are implemented by this federal Labor government and in the programs that they roll out. There is no appetite to embed sustainability at all. Instead what we get are these gestures and these stunts—not the genius and the substantive commitment to bring about change over time to show an example to our nation that a cleaner and greener way of living is within our reach and the opportunities for energy savings not only in our own homes but across our economy are there, are real and are completely affordable. We do not see that example coming through.

Last Sunday was Sustainable House Day in Langwarrin South. I thank the people who invited me to that property, the many who turned up and those involved in opening this home in Langwarrin South that shows the way forward includes the way a building is designed—its solar orientation, the external walls, the internal walls, the way the roof was structured, the floor, the window treatments, heating and cooling systems, awnings, blinds, double glazing, heating and cooling, the way water is harvested, water heating itself, and solar and wind generation. These and a range of other features show the range of opportunities for improving the sustainability of our homes. We need to do that. But this government is a one-trick pony. They have got pink batts—grossly overextended in terms of our capability to implement that policy—no interest in other ways of lifting the performance of homes, no recognition of other actions that can be taken. You see this right across the housing industry, in the way homes are designed and managed and even in the way programs like the National Rental Affordability Scheme are managed. It basically puts sustainability attributes in a ‘nice to have but not essential’ category. Even in the Building the Education Revolution Program, one in nine of those buildings do not even have insulation. Barely half of them have other features like solar-efficient glazing and other technology. This government has been caught out; it is all over the place on sustainability. It is a shame we did not have the MPI time today to outline the opposition’s view and pathway forward, because it is a coherent, embedded view—not one that is bolted on. It is not like safety in the 1970s when if you had a safety officer you were okay. We learned that safety was everybody’s business, just like sustainability should be everybody’s business. There are not just green jobs. (Time expired)

See this speech in context